A petition asking for the summoning of Bollywood actor Vivek Oberoi, his father Suresh Oberoi, and his Delhi-based company Yashi Multimedia Pvt Ltd for allegedly defrauding an entertainment company in 2003 was denied by the Delhi High Court.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav stated that he was denying the relief not only because the petitioner had used civil remedies, but also because the court found that reading the entirety of the complaint would not, on the surface, indicate that the Indian Penal Code’s cheating offence had been committed (IPC).
According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, one of the reasons to dismiss the case would be non-disclosure of the commission of the offence on the basis of the complete complaint, the top court ruled in an order.
In order to get summonses against the Oberoi family and their business, petitioner Deepak Mehta, CEO of Mumbai’s Mehta Entertainment, first filed a criminal case with a magisterial court in Delhi.
The grievance was rejected.
The dismissal was contested before the high court and then a revisional court. “This court sees no basis to interfere with the order reached by the courts below in exercise of its authority under Section 482 of the CrPc (Criminal Procedure Code),” the high court stated in dismissing the case. It stated, “Therefore, the instant petition is rejected.” According to the allegation, the petitioner operated an event management company and planned celebrity or cine star and film actor appearances across the country.
The plea contends that after the complainant met the Oberois in January 2003, Suresh Oberoi asked him to arrange certain performances for his son Vivek in the USA and Canada in August and September of that same year.
It claimed that the contract for organising the events had been signed, Vivek’s approval had been acquired, and it had been decided that the shows would be held in August or September 2003 and that the actor would receive USD $3,000,000.
“The complainant added that he transferred the aforementioned sum to respondent no. 1’s bank account (Yashi Entertainment). The concerts were organised by the complainant, but respondent no. 5 (Vivek Oberoi) did not appear “the accusatory plea. The complainant’s money was not returned despite attempts to resolve the matter, it was claimed.